Officials at the Office of Administration assume they are responsible for maintaining the State's
nine labor contracts which cover eleven bargaining units, as well as assisting agencies with union
contract negotiations, union-related activities, and other union-related inquiries. This includes
ensuring agencies comply with applicable statutes while assisting in these responsibilities.

Section 290.590.2 of the proposed legislation would prohibit all state agencies and political
subdivisions that currently have or could have employees covered under a labor organization as
defined by the legislation from requiring their employees to pay any dues, fees, assessments, or
other similar chargers however denominated of any kind or amount as a condition or
continuation of employment. The Office of Administration would have to ensure this provision
is complied with during all future negotiations. Section 290.590.7(5) would exempt any such
agreement entered into before the effective date of this legislation.

Section 33.103, RSMo allows for the Commissioner of Administration to deduct from employee
paychecks qualified state tuition contributions, payments to the State owed by an employee,
charitable campaign contributions, cafeteria plan, etc. The Office of Administration may be
considered a "labor organization" as defined in this legislation. Therefore, Section 290.590.2(2)
may prohibit such deductions.

Officials at the Office of Attorney General (AGO) assume this proposal gives AGO
non-discretionary concurrent jurisdiction to prosecuting attorneys and the AGO to investigate
complaints of violations, including class C misdemeanors and civil damages, and to use "all
means at their command" to ensure effective enforcement. The number of any violations would
be unknown. Therefore costs to AGO are unknown but could exceed $100,000. If significant
cases result from the proposal, AGO may seek an additional future appropriation to effectively
enforce it.

Officials at the Office of Prosecution Services (OPS) assume no measurable impact to OPS.
The creation of a new crime creates additional responsibilities for county prosecutors which may
in turn result in additional costs which are difficult to determine.

Officials at the City of Kansas City, Department of Agriculture, Department of
Conservation, Department of Corrections, Department of Economic Development,
Department of Higher Education, Department of Health and Senior Services, Department
of Insurance, Financial Institutions and Professional Registration, Department of Labor

ASSUMPTION (continued)

and Industrial Relations, Department of Mental Health, Department of Natural Resources,
Department of Revenue, Department of Social Services, Lawrence County, Lincoln
University, Linn State Technical College, Metropolitan Community College, Missouri
Department of Transportation, Missouri Southern State University, Missouri State
University, Missouri Veterans Commission, Missouri Western State University, Office of
the State Auditor, Office of State Courts Administrator, Office of the State Public
Defender, Office of State Treasurer, Parkway School District, St. Louis County, University
of Central Missouri and the University of Missouri assume that there is no fiscal impact from
this proposal.

Officials at the Department of Elementary and Secondary Education assume there is no state
cost to the foundation formula associated with this proposal. Should the new crimes and
amendments to current law result in additional fines or penalties, DESE cannot know how much
additional money might be collected by local governments or the DOR to distribute to schools.
To the extent fine revenues exceed 2004-2005 collections, any increase in this money distributed
to schools increases the deduction in the foundation formula the following year. Therefore the
affected districts will see an equal decrease in the amount of funding received through the
formula the following year; unless the affected districts are hold-harmless, in which case the
districts will not see a decrease in the amount of funding received through the formula (any
increase in fine money distributed to the hold-harmless districts will simply be additional
money). An increase in the deduction (all other factors remaining constant) reduces the cost to
the state of funding the formula.

Officials at the Office of the Secretary of State (SOS) assume that Article III section 52(b) of
the Missouri Constitution authorizes the general assembly to order a special election for
measures referred to the people. Section 115.063.2 RSMo requires the state to pay the costs.
This proposal calls for a special election rather than being voted on at a general election. The
cost of the special election has been estimated to be $7 million based on the cost of the previous
Presidential Primary and a cost determined by Legislative Oversight.

The Secretary of State's office is required to pay for publishing in local newspapers the full text
of each statewide ballot measure as directed by Article XII, Section 2(b) of the Missouri
Constitution and Section 116.230-116.290, RSMo. The Secretary of State's office is provided
with core funding to handle a certain amount of normal activity resulting from each year's
legislative session. Funding for this item is adjusted each year depending upon the election cycle
with $1.3 million historically appropriated in odd numbered fiscal years and $100,000
appropriated in even numbered fiscal years to meet these requirements. The appropriation has

ASSUMPTION (continued)

historically been an estimated appropriation because the final cost is dependent upon the number
of ballot measures approved by the General Assembly and the initiative petitions certified for the
ballot. In FY 2011, at the August and November elections, there were 6 statewide Constitutional
Amendments or ballot propositions that cost $1.02 million to publish (an average of $170,000
per issue). Therefore, the Secretary of State's office assumes, for the purposes of this fiscal note,
that it should have the full appropriation authority it needs to meet the publishing requirements.
However, because these requirements are mandatory, we reserve the right to request funding to
meet the cost of our publishing requirements if the Governor and the General Assembly change
the amount or eliminate the estimated nature of our appropriation.

Oversight has reflected in this fiscal note, the state potentially reimbursing local political
subdivisions the cost of having this issue voted on during a special election in fiscal year 2013.
This reflects the decision made by the Joint Committee on Legislative Research, that the cost of
the elections should be shown in the fiscal note. The next scheduled general election is in
November 2012 (FY 2013). It is assumed the subject within this proposal could be on that
ballot; however, the proposal states it shall be in August 2013. Therefore, Oversight will reflect
a potential election cost reimbursement to local political subdivisions in FY 2013.

To estimate the expense the state would incur for reimbursing local political subdivisions for a
special election, Oversight requested expense estimates from all election authorities for an
election. Eighty-six out of the one hundred fifteen election authorities responded to Oversight’s
request. From these respondents; the total election expense that would have to be reimbursed by
the state government is over $7 million. Therefore, Oversight will reflect a potential cost borne
by the state in FY 2013 of over $7 million for reimbursement to the local political subdivisions.

FISCAL IMPACT - State Government

FY 2013

(10 Mo.)

FY 2014

FY 2015

GENERAL REVENUE

Expense - reimbursement of local
political subdivisions for special election
costs

$0 or (More
than
$7,000,000)

$0

$0

ESTIMATED NET EFFECT TO THE
GENERAL REVENUE FUND

$0 or (More
than
$7,000,000)

$0

$0

FISCAL IMPACT - Local Government

FY 2013

(10 Mo.)

FY 2014

FY 2015

LOCAL POLITICAL SUBDIVISIONS

Income - cost reimbursement from the
State for special election

$0 or More than
$7,000,000

$0

$0

Expense - cost for special election

$0 or (More
than
$7,000,000)

$0

$0

ESTIMATED NET EFFECT TO
LOCAL POLITICAL SUBDIVISIONS

$0

$0

$0

FISCAL IMPACT - Small Business

No direct fiscal impact to small businesses would be expected as a result of this proposal.

FISCAL DESCRIPTION

Upon voter approval, employers are barred from requiring employees to become or refrain from
becoming a member of a labor organization or pay dues or other charges required of labor
organization members as a condition of employment.

This legislation is not federally mandated, would not duplicate any other program and would not
require additional capital improvements or rental space.

SOURCES OF INFORMATION

City of Kansas City

Department of Agriculture

Department of Conservation

Department of Corrections

Department of Economic Development

Department of Elementary and Secondary Education

Department of Health and Senior Services

SOURCES OF INFORMATION (continued)

Department of Higher Education

Department of Insurance, Financial Institutions and Professional Registration